Grutter: Where Do We Go from Here?: The Impact of the Supreme Court Decisions in the University of Michigan Affirmative Action Cases

2004 ◽  
pp. 76
Author(s):  
William G. Bowen
Keyword(s):  
Affirmative Action ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
University Of Michigan ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decisions ◽  
The University ◽  
The Impact

Gratz v. Bollinger

2020 ◽  
pp. 215-242
Author(s):  
Matthew Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Affirmative Action ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
University Of Michigan ◽  
Racial Justice ◽  
Undergraduate Admissions ◽  
Business Interests ◽  
The Arts ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Selective Incorporation ◽  
The University

This chapter studies Gratz v. Bollinger, which challenged the racially attentive undergraduate admissions practices of the College of Literature, Science, and the Arts in the University of Michigan (UM). Grutter v. Bollinger, which challenged the Law School's admissions practices, was filed soon thereafter. These cases put UM on a crash course with the Supreme Court. The chapter then highlights UM's defense of affirmative action, showing how the university's co-optation of racial justice aligned with the rightward shift of the Supreme Court since the 1980s. UM leaders' preference for diversity over the social justice rationale, their discomfort with enrollment targets, their efforts to make affirmative action serve business interests, and their selective incorporation of social science that promoted the benefits of interracial contact all made UM's chances of swaying at least one conservative justice more likely.

Case Study 1: The Gratz and Grutter Supreme Court Cases against the University of Michigan

2020 ◽  
pp. 115-154
Author(s):  
J. Scott Carter ◽  
Cameron D. Lippard
Keyword(s):  
Affirmative Action ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
University Of Michigan ◽  
Higher Education Admissions ◽  
First Case ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Color Blind ◽  
The University

The purpose of this chapter is to understand arguments put forth by these social authorities (individuals and groups) in support and opposition to affirmative action within a prominent debate on affirmative action in higher education admissions. We are particularly interested in advocacy groups that have the ability and resources not afforded to most individuals to lobby the Supreme Court. We used the Gratz v. Bollinger et al. and Grutter v. Bollinger et al. U.S. Supreme Court cases as the site of the first case study. We look at how these entities deployed specific arguments and rhetoric within court documents to frame affirmative action to Supreme Court Justices. In particular, while all frames were considered, we look at two discursive frames prominent in the literature and how they were used by supporters and opponents of the policy: color-blind and threat frames. Findings demonstrate that while supporters often used color-blind arguments (and some threat as well), the opponent briefs were saturated with both color-blind frames.

scholarly journals Le droit de recours de l'entrepreneur contre l'ingénieur ou l'architecte à la lumière d'arrêts récents de la Cour suprême

2005 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 625-638
Author(s):  
Thérèse Rousseau-Houle
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decisions ◽  
The Relationship

This paper surveys recent Supreme Court decisions dealing with the relationship between building contractors and architects or engineers participating in the same project. Normally, the agreement between the owner and the architect or the owner and the engineer vests no rights in the building contractor. The latter may only sue the architect or the engineer on an extra-contractual basis. Proceedings may then take the form of a recursory action, where the contractor, having been held jointly and severally liable towards the owner, attempts to have the architect or engineer take their share of liability. Alternatively, proceedings could be taken on the basis of a delict, in cases where negligence is alleged by the contractor against the architect or engineer. The Supreme Court seems inclined to view the problem from a contract perspective, and to restrict opportunities to sue on the basis of a delict.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document